MARY ELLEN TURPEL-LAFOND’S TAKE ON THE RADITA TRIAL

In light of the murder trial of two parents in the death of their son, Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, B.C.'s Child and Youth advocate criticized the failure to share information between child welfare agencies between provinces. An entire article by Andrew Russell writing in Global TV's online news can be found here.

THE TRIAL OF THE RADITAS

This news is now almost one-month-old, but it serves as a follow-up to the previous post that accents the need for interprovincial information links when cases of concern appear on two or more provinces.

Emil & Rodica Radita

ALEX DIED AT AGE 15, WEIGHING 37 POUNDS.

The defense position offered by the lawyer for Mrs. Radita was that Rodica and Emil Radita may be guilty of poor diabetes management for their son Alexandru, or even for failing to provide the necessities of life, but that is not murder. Both Radita, 53, and her 59-year-old husband, Emil, plead not guilty to a first-degree murder charge in the May 7, 2013, starvation death of the 15-year-old boy. In a body that was a skeletal horror that weighed only 37 pounds, Alexandru died of a bacterial infection secondary to his malnutrition and untreated diabetes Type 1.

ALEX WAS 15 YRS OLD & WEIGHED 37 LBS WHEN HE DIED

ALEX RADITA

News agencies have covered the case of Alex Radita, a teen whose death has led to a murder charge. Alex was 15 years of age and weighed 37 lbs when he died. His parents, Emil, and Rodica are charged with first-degree murder. Their faith life factors into the neglect. It's an awful story. 

You can read about it at the following sites but be warned, this story contains content some readers may find disturbing. Discretion is strongly advised.

CBC Calgary

Calgary Herald News

Global News Radita Trial

In view of the case history, Ray Ferris, my friend, an occasional commentator here, veteran MCFD employee, advisor to and advocate for parents has written this letter to the Editor of the Times Colonist.

EMIL & RODICA

"Mr. and Mrs. Radita are not the only ones who should be in the dock over the death of their son. From early court records, it was obvious that the mother was incapable of rational thought.  She insisted her son was not ill and all they needed to do was to pray. She tried to encourage the boy to resist the doctors when they gave him insulin shots. Because they only spoke Rumanian to each other she was difficult to supervise. She repeatedly tried to sabotage his treatment. In the face of such invincible ignorance the only thing that could guarantee the boy’s survival was permanent removal from the parents. The social workers should have known that but they tap danced around the evidence and there were repeated dangerous episodes until the inevitable happened.

37 LBS @ 15TH B-DAY PARTY, TRIES TO SMILE

    This is typical of how the child protection workers fail in their mandate. When they encounter a case with compelling evidence, they cannot make up their minds until it is too late. The next day they are removing children and keeping them in care for years based only on hearsay, presumption, and unreliable so-called expert witnesses. I would also put the director in the dock, because it is the directors who authorize all the bad decisions."